Stand-off continues: Jirga unable to settle dispute over dismissal of prayer leader

Local mosque embroilled in tussle over land ownership


Our Correspondent December 05, 2014

MANSEHRA: Locals will have to wait a while longer for their neighbourhood mosque to reopen its doors to worshippers as a jirga formed to solve a dispute over the dismissal of a prayer leader has been unsuccessful thus far.

The jirga has been unable to strike a compromise between the Gujjar and Swati tribes, said police sources. The Markazi Jamia mosque in Mahandri village was sealed after tensions between the two groups escalated the previous week.



Ulemas and elders of the two tribes developed differences after landowner Shah Jehan Khan Swati dismissed prayer leader Maulana Abdul Rasheed. Rasheed, an elder from the Gujjar tribe, had been leading prayers at the mosque since a considerable period of time.

Khan accused Rasheed of transferring the donated piece of land to his own name. The land owner said he had been cheated and barred Rasheed from leading prayers, causing outrage among the latter’s followers. Police said his followers protested against the decision and pelted stones at Swati’s car.

Rasheed claimed he paid the price of the land to Swati some years ago and got it transferred to his name. He added the land was dedicated for the mosque and not in his personal use.

The war of words led to the increasing possibility of armed confrontation between both groups, causing the DC Mansehra and the police to intervene.

The DC formed an eight-member jirga last week to settle the dispute and was left with little choice but to seal the premises in question. The mosque remains locked as both sides stick to their guns.

Some insiders have said this is a political dispute rather than a religious one. They say both groups are from the Deobandi sect of Islam but have different political affiliations.

Published in The Express Tribune, December 6th, 2014.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ